Protestant Christians...did you know?

[pjn6444]

I am a former protestant and I have to ask all the protestants out there,

Did you know that Jesus said,
“21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” KJV

Did you know that the Canon of the New Testament was not formed until the 4th century?

Did you know that Ignatius of Antioch said.
“Be not deceived, my brethren: If anyone follows a maker of schism *, he does not inherit the kingdom of God; if anyone walks in strange doctrine *, he has no part in the passion [of Christ]. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of his blood; one altar, as there is one bishop, with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons” (Letter to the Philadelphians 3:3–4:1 [A.D. 110]).

Did you know that Jerome said,
“Heretics bring sentence upon themselves since they by their own choice withdraw from the Church, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes damnation. Between heresy and schism there is this difference: that heresy involves perverse doctrine, while schism separates one from the Church on account of disagreement with the bishop. Nevertheless, there is no schism which does not trump up a heresy to justify its departure from the Church” (Commentary on Titus 3:10–11 [A.D. 386]).

Did you know that this is in scripture,
John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Did you know that Paul said,
2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Did you know that,
some protestant denominations claim the bible is completely literal, except when Jesus says “this is my Body…This is my Blood”

Did you know that,
all protestant denominations were formed more than 1000 years after Christ died.

Did you know that,
Constantine did not create the Catholic Church

Did you know that,
if Constantine had created the church, then the Council of Nicea would have been invalid since this was after that.

Did you know that,
it does not command that Worship be on Sunday in the Bible. This was decided upon by the Catholic church.

Did you know that,
numerous things you do are not in the Bible at all. They are traditions of the Catholic Church.

Did you know that,
Luther called the Epistle of James an “epistle of straw”

Did you know that,
the Ecumenical Councils are considered tradition and not scripture. How much of your faith is based off of the councils?**

 

[nsper7]

Did you know that Jesus said,
“21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”

Look at the the context for that verse. He is addressing the Pharisees who did prophecy in God’s name and did many righteous works (including casting out demons, Judaism does have a history of exorcism actually), but they refused to acknowledge Jesus as Lord/God and Savior. Thus, although they believed in God (and, it is assumed, would believe in Jesus when they see Him in glory), they rejected His Only Son and even murdered Him (talk about a work of iniquity).

Also, note where He says He never knew them. If someone is Baptized (in the Trinitarian Formula, with intent and with water), then they would be Saved until they committed the mortal sin of heresy/rejecting God’s Church. Thus, Jesus ‘knew them’ until they fell away. This verse is addressing people who never believed in Christ (i.e. the Pharisees).

Did you know that the Canon of the New Testament was not formed until the 4th century?

Yes, but you might want to read more on the history of canonization of the NT. Read On the Formation of the NT Canon by J. P. Holding. There was a process to canonization. And although the Catholic Church did put together the canon, it leads to two observations:

1. Is the Catholic Church of the 4th Century the same as the Catholic Church of the 16th Century (beginning of the major Protestant Reformation) and modern times in terms of theology, form and authority?
2. (Related to the first question) Just because God worked through the Catholic Church to canonize the NT, does that necessarily legitimize the Catholic Church as a whole or for all time? God has done many great works through fallible bodies, but they don’t have continued authority (we recognize that God worked through the Israelites/Jews to give us the OT, but the Catholic Church does not say that Jews have anymore theological authority now).

Yes, God worked through the Roman Catholic Church to give us the NT Canon, but that does not prove that He approves of the RCC then or now. It seems fairly clear in Scripture may use a person for good, even if that person is up to no good or questionable (i.e. Balaam).

Did you know that Ignatius of Antioch said.
“Be not deceived, my brethren: If anyone follows a maker of schism *, he does not inherit the kingdom of God; if anyone walks in strange doctrine *, he has no part in the passion [of Christ]. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of his blood; one altar, as there is one bishop, with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons” (Letter to the Philadelphians 3:3–4:1 [A.D. 110]).

Did you know that Jerome said,
“Heretics bring sentence upon themselves since they by their own choice withdraw from the Church, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes damnation. Between heresy and schism there is this difference: that heresy involves perverse doctrine, while schism separates one from the Church on account of disagreement with the bishop. Nevertheless, there is no schism which does not trump up a heresy to justify its departure from the Church” (Commentary on Titus 3:10–11 [A.D. 386]).**

Okay. Although we can respect the Early Church Fathers, this is still their own opinion and was said over a thousand years before the Reformation. Would they have said the same thing if they had been Luther’s shoes seeing the corruption with the sale of indulgences and the political-secular authority and opulence of the Popes? At the time of these writings, the schisms that occurred were pretty much gnostic in some form or another and had no Scriptural leg to stand on.

Did you know that this is in scripture,
John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Again, this doesn’t prove anything about the Roman Catholic Church. This doesn’t prove that the RCC and the Pope are to ‘fill-in-the-blanks’. And notice it says ‘did’, not ‘taught’. While it might be interesting to learn about more miracles, it is Jesus’ teachings that are at question here. Does the Roman Catholic Church have ‘other’ teachings of Jesus? It should be noted that ‘poieo’ (Greek for ‘did’) does not, according to Strong’s Concordance connote ‘teach’.

((It’s getting late. I’ll touch on the rest tomorrow))

 

[Syele]

Didn’t we just do this?

 

[Syele]

I am a former protestant and I have to ask all the protestants out there,

Did you know that Jesus said,
“21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” KJV

Yes, did YOU know that I have yet to meet a Catholic in person that could tell me the basics of their faith that was not a Priest? Did you know that that passage refers to both protestants AND Catholics?

Did you know that the Canon of the New Testament was not formed until the 4th century?

Yes, and?

Did you know that Ignatius of Antioch said.
“Be not deceived, my brethren: If anyone follows a maker of schism *, he does not inherit the kingdom of God; if anyone walks in strange doctrine *, he has no part in the passion [of Christ]. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of his blood; one altar, as there is one bishop, with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons” (Letter to the Philadelphians 3:3–4:1 [A.D. 110]). **

your point?

Did you know that Jerome said,
“Heretics bring sentence upon themselves since they by their own choice withdraw from the Church, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes damnation. Between heresy and schism there is this difference: that heresy involves perverse doctrine, while schism separates one from the Church on account of disagreement with the bishop. Nevertheless, there is no schism which does not trump up a heresy to justify its departure from the Church” (Commentary on Titus 3:10–11 [A.D. 386]).

Did you know I never withdrew from the Catholic Church since I was never made part of it? DId you know that most Protestants know nothing of Catholics much less ever got in a disagreement with a Bishop?

Did you know that this is in scripture,
John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Of course. Who would think that every minute of Jesus 33 years was recorded in scripture?

Did you know that Paul said,
2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Ahh but you don’t know what traditions I’ve been taught. And tell me, How would a protestant who knows nothing of the Catholic Church (ie most of them) hold fast to the Traditions of the Catholic Church since they were never taught them??

Did you know that,
some protestant denominations claim the bible is completely literal, except when Jesus says “this is my Body…This is my Blood”

I know about many many denominations. Why not just make your point instead of assuming protestants don’t know about this?

Did you know that,
all protestant denominations were formed more than 1000 years after Christ died.

DId you know that you were born well over 1000 years after Christ died?

Did you know that,
Constantine did not create the Catholic Church

I never once heard anyone claim he did.

Did you know that,
if Constantine had created the church, then the Council of Nicea would have been invalid since this was after that.

see above.

Did you know that,
it does not command that Worship be on Sunday in the Bible. This was decided upon by the Catholic church.

Did you know that all Protestants are not anti-Catholics weirdos who thing the world began when Luther nailed a paper to a door? Did you know that a large portion of us believe the history of our own church is rooted int he Catholic one? Did you know that if any one looks hard enough they can find someone who unjustly hates them for some reason or another?

Did you know that,
numerous things you do are not in the Bible at all. They are traditions of the Catholic Church.

Did you know that not only do I know this, but it never has bothered me in the least?

Did you know that,
Luther called the Epistle of James an “epistle of straw”

Yes I did know that, Did you know that I do not follow Luther and yet I am still a bona fide protestant?

Did you know that,
the Ecumenical Councils are considered tradition and not scripture. How much of your faith is based off of the councils?

Did you know that Catholics are unable to tell me any Tradition of their Church that has no backing in Scripture in at least a vague way? Did you know that councils do not bother me at all?

 

[mozart-250]

Yes I knew that. Your point being?

Ah…never mind. Carry on.

 

[Steadfast]

But Syele,

We do this all the time, in fact, when you drill down, this is ALL WE EVER DO AROUND HERE.

Anyhow, yeah I knew all that.

Still Protestant.

 

[Lee]

Yes, but you might want to read more on the history of canonization of the NT. Read On the Formation of the NT Canon by J. P. Holding. There was a process to canonization. And although the Catholic Church did put together the canon, it leads to two observations:

1. Is the Catholic Church of the 4th Century the same as the Catholic Church of the 16th Century (beginning of the major Protestant Reformation) and modern times in terms of theology, form and authority?
2. (Related to the first question) Just because God worked through the Catholic Church to canonize the NT, does that necessarily legitimize the Catholic Church as a whole or for all time? God has done many great works through fallible bodies, but they don’t have continued authority (we recognize that God worked through the Israelites/Jews to give us the OT, but the Catholic Church does not say that Jews have anymore theological authority now).

Yes, God worked through the Roman Catholic Church to give us the NT Canon, but that does not prove that He approves of the RCC then or now. It seems fairly clear in Scripture may use a person for good, even if that person is up to no good or questionable (i.e. Balaam).

Your question begs this question then. Is Jesus a liar? If God worked through the RCC to give us the canon of scripture then
is it not the church that Christ himself says the gates of hell shall not prevail against? Do you not believe the words of Christ himself? Sure, its members, priests, popes, laymen have all sinned. Have failed. Show me a church whose members havent? Christ said he came forthe sinner, not the righteous. I am sure someone else can answer this much better than I.

Okay. Although we can respect the Early Church Fathers, this is still their own opinion and was said over a thousand years before the Reformation. Would they have said the same thing if they had been Luther’s shoes seeing the corruption with the sale of indulgences and the political-secular authority and opulence of the Popes? At the time of these writings, the schisms that occurred were pretty much gnostic in some form or another and had no Scriptural leg to stand on.

Nor does Luther´s faith alone have scriptural or tradition to stand on. Sure, I can agree with him about the corruption (although I dont think it was as widespread as some would have us believe). But Luther went farther than just trying to reform.

 

[Hisalone]

But Syele,

We do this all the time, in fact, when you drill down, this is ALL WE EVER DO AROUND HERE.

Anyhow, yeah I knew all that.

Still Protestant.

Youd think they would tire of all this?

 

[Syele]

Youd think they would tire of all this?

yeah, I answered a long post, but it wasnt very charitable so i deleted it.

Yes, pjn6444, we knew all that. And surprisingly enough is bothers very few.

Try making seperate threads for your seperate issues with Protestants. Then when you do, get to the point and we can discuss it.

 

[SyCarl]

I really wish that people could stop treating each other as stupid. Yes, Protestants now the things you stated. Yes we know of James 2 and John 6. Just because we disagree with you does not mean we are ignorant.

The same goes for Protestants. I am sure that Catholics get just as sick of Protestants pointing out passages like Ephesians 2:7-8 and 2 Timothy 3:16 as if they were not aware of them.

 

[Steadfast]

SyCarl,

These Catholics cannot understand why we are not Catholic as well.

They assume that we are either

1. 
   *]Stupid: We just don’t get it…
   *]Ignorant: No one has ever enlightened us…
   *]Lazy: We prefer the comfort of our error to the hard work and heavy lifting of becoming Catholic… or
   *]Obstinate: We know that we should be Catholic but persist in not converting of sheer stubborn contentiousness.
   This is interesting because the very same kinds of conclusions could be drawn about Catholics as to why they remain in error rather than embracing the truth of free grace and sole bible authority. Some Protestants actually do stoop to this sort of thing, but it is far more rare than when Catholics come up with this kind of “Hey poor benighted, possibly stupid, fat, lazy Protestants…did you know?” effort.
   
   We see this almost every day.

 

[Singinbeauty]

SyCarl,

These Catholics cannot understand why we are not Catholic as well.

They assume that we are either

1. 
   *]Stupid: We just don’t get it…
   *]Ignorant: No one has ever enlightened us…
   *]Lazy: We prefer the comfort of our error to the hard work and heavy lifting of becoming Catholic… or
   *]Obstinate: We know that we should be Catholic but persist in not converting of sheer stubborn contentiousness.
   This is interesting because the very same kinds of conclusions could be drawn about Catholics as to why they remain in error rather than embracing the truth of free grace and sole bible authority. Some Protestants actually do stoop to this sort of thing, but it is far more rare than when Catholics come up with this kind of “Hey poor benighted, possibly stupid, fat, lazy Protestants…did you know?” effort.
   
   We see this almost every day.

1. 
   Which is exactly the reason for my rant in ’Catholic Christins… Did you know?'
   
   Again guys, protestants are NOT stupid. So please, stop acting like we are…

 

[KJK80]

%between%

Again guys, protestants are NOT stupid. So please, stop acting like we are…

Isn’t there somebody we can all gang up on together? Some Protestant’s think Catholic’s are stupid (I know I did), some Catholic’s think Protestant’s are stupid (I know I cannot, that would be calling my mother stupid, I won’t do that, and wouldn’t–I understand both sides now)…

But c’mon, let’s go with making fun of the Pastafarian’s or something. That should make us all feel better! OK, so we shouldn’t make fun of anyone or act like anyone is stupid—but that’s beside the point.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

Threads like this should be aimed more at rabid anti-Catholics, most of the times fundamentalist Christians, more so than the evangelical Christians who seem to stay around here.

They assume that we are either

1. Stupid: We just don’t get it…
2. Ignorant: No one has ever enlightened us…
3. Lazy: We prefer the comfort of our error to the hard work and heavy lifting of becoming Catholic… or
4. Obstinate: We know that we should be Catholic but persist in not converting of sheer stubborn contentiousness.

I don’t consider non-Catholic Christians (in general) any of these things, however there are Protestants who are, stupid, ignorant, lazy, and obstinate just like there are Catholics who are stupid, ignorant, lazy, and obstinate. My self falling into a couple of those categories

Isn’t there somebody we can all gang up on together?

The Proles.

God bless

 

[allischalmers]

I am a former protestant and I have to ask all the protestants out there,

Did you know that Jesus said,
“21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” KJV

Did you know that the Canon of the New Testament was not formed until the 4th century?

Did you know that Ignatius of Antioch said.
“Be not deceived, my brethren: If anyone follows a maker of schism *, he does not inherit the kingdom of God; if anyone walks in strange doctrine *, he has no part in the passion [of Christ]. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of his blood; one altar, as there is one bishop, with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons” (Letter to the Philadelphians 3:3–4:1 [A.D. 110]).

Did you know that Jerome said,
“Heretics bring sentence upon themselves since they by their own choice withdraw from the Church, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes damnation. Between heresy and schism there is this difference: that heresy involves perverse doctrine, while schism separates one from the Church on account of disagreement with the bishop. Nevertheless, there is no schism which does not trump up a heresy to justify its departure from the Church” (Commentary on Titus 3:10–11 [A.D. 386]).

Did you know that this is in scripture,
John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Did you know that Paul said,
2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Did you know that,
some protestant denominations claim the bible is completely literal, except when Jesus says “this is my Body…This is my Blood”

Did you know that,
all protestant denominations were formed more than 1000 years after Christ died.

Did you know that,
Constantine did not create the Catholic Church

Did you know that,
if Constantine had created the church, then the Council of Nicea would have been invalid since this was after that.

Did you know that,
it does not command that Worship be on Sunday in the Bible. This was decided upon by the Catholic church.

Did you know that,
numerous things you do are not in the Bible at all. They are traditions of the Catholic Church.

Did you know that,
Luther called the Epistle of James an “epistle of straw”

Did you know that,
the Ecumenical Councils are considered tradition and not scripture. How much of your faith is based off of the councils?**

Sooooooooooooooooooo

 

[Steadfast]

The Proles.

God bless

No.

Absolutely not.

I need them to consume material handling equipment parts.

 

[catholiconce]

Look at the the context for that verse. He is addressing the Pharisees who did prophecy in God’s name and did many righteous works (including casting out demons, Judaism does have a history of exorcism actually), but they refused to acknowledge Jesus as Lord/God and Savior. Thus, although they believed in God (and, it is assumed, would believe in Jesus when they see Him in glory), they rejected His Only Son and even murdered Him (talk about a work of iniquity).

Also, note where He says He never knew them. If someone is Baptized (in the Trinitarian Formula, with intent and with water), then they would be Saved until they committed the mortal sin of heresy/rejecting God’s Church. Thus, Jesus ‘knew them’ until they fell away. This verse is addressing people who never believed in Christ (i.e. the Pharisees).

Yes, but you might want to read more on the history of canonization of the NT. Read On the Formation of the NT Canon by J. P. Holding. There was a process to canonization. And although the Catholic Church did put together the canon, it leads to two observations:

1. Is the Catholic Church of the 4th Century the same as the Catholic Church of the 16th Century (beginning of the major Protestant Reformation) and modern times in terms of theology, form and authority?
2. (Related to the first question) Just because God worked through the Catholic Church to canonize the NT, does that necessarily legitimize the Catholic Church as a whole or for all time? God has done many great works through fallible bodies, but they don’t have continued authority (we recognize that God worked through the Israelites/Jews to give us the OT, but the Catholic Church does not say that Jews have anymore theological authority now).

Yes, God worked through the Roman Catholic Church to give us the NT Canon, but that does not prove that He approves of the RCC then or now. It seems fairly clear in Scripture may use a person for good, even if that person is up to no good or questionable (i.e. Balaam).

Okay. Although we can respect the Early Church Fathers, this is still their own opinion and was said over a thousand years before the Reformation. Would they have said the same thing if they had been Luther’s shoes seeing the corruption with the sale of indulgences and the political-secular authority and opulence of the Popes? At the time of these writings, the schisms that occurred were pretty much gnostic in some form or another and had no Scriptural leg to stand on.

Again, this doesn’t prove anything about the Roman Catholic Church. This doesn’t prove that the RCC and the Pope are to ‘fill-in-the-blanks’. And notice it says ‘did’, not ‘taught’. While it might be interesting to learn about more miracles, it is Jesus’ teachings that are at question here. Does the Roman Catholic Church have ‘other’ teachings of Jesus? It should be noted that ‘poieo’ (Greek for ‘did’) does not, according to Strong’s Concordance connote ‘teach’.

((It’s getting late. I’ll touch on the rest tomorrow))

Thank You nsper7 I am speechless. Thank you for making these points The Holy spirit is working through you. I hope others will listen.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

Thank You nsper7 I am speechless. Thank you for making these points The Holy spirit is working through you. I hope others will listen.

What is it that you hope others will gain by listening to nsper7? Why not just come out and say it? Don’t be shy.

What part of the Big Sky Country are you from?

God bless

 

[nsper7]

Your question begs this question then. Is Jesus a liar? If God worked through the RCC to give us the canon of scripture then
is it not the church that Christ himself says the gates of hell shall not prevail against? Do you not believe the words of Christ himself? Sure, its members, priests, popes, laymen have all sinned. Have failed. Show me a church whose members havent? Christ said he came forthe sinner, not the righteous. I am sure someone else can answer this much better than I.

Well, you still haven’t proven that the Roman Catholic Church is the fulfillment of the visible Church. Yes, the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox (who also claim that their sect was truly founded by Christ and the RCC split from them) have history on their side (to a degree; I’d challenge any Roman Catholic to comment on this article examining the Early Church Fathers: The Church Fathers’ Interpretation of the Rock of Matthew 16:18: An Historical Refutation of the Claims of Roman Catholicism), this does not prove that the RCC is the one visible Church at this time (I sincerely hope that Catholics are Saved and I do not comment on others Salvation, it gauls me when certain Protestants start playing the ‘guess who’s going to Hell’ game; hey, it would be cool to get to hang out with John Paul II, Pius X, Benedict XVI and all the other Papas in Heaven ). Personally, I focus more strongly on the idea of the invisible Church. When I recite the Nicene Creed every Sunday, I firmly believe there is One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, but it is not limited to a single sect, rite or denomination. It is now common knowledge that there are numerous denominations and, even within Roman Catholicism, there are divergent beliefs (just check out that ‘Would You Join a Crusade?’ thread).

It could well be argued that during the earlier years of the Church (both when they were being heavily persecuted by the Romans and Jews; and the during the so-called Dark Ages when education and Scripture were not readily available to the average Christian) that a strong centralized Church hierarchy was needed in order to maintain doctrine and order (note that the Pre-Lutheran schismatics were anything but ‘Sola Scriptura’, they were Scripture+Gnosticism usually or Scripture+some other flukey theology).

Nor does Luther´s faith alone have scriptural or tradition to stand on. Sure, I can agree with him about the corruption (although I dont think it was as widespread as some would have us believe). But Luther went farther than just trying to reform.

In terms of tradition, one would have to study the writing of various Christian (ECF, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox) to determine if the idea of ‘faith alone’ was ever discussed Pre-Luther. In terms of Scripture, the fact that there are many Protestant apologists who have spent years studying Scripture and the writing of the ‘Protestant’ Fathers (i.e. Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, the Anglican theologians, Wesley, etc.) and remain steadfast in their beliefs points to the fact that some Scriptural defense can be made. Although Luther was flawed (i.e. wanting to get rid of the Epistle of James and adding ‘alone’ to the Romans passage on Salvation through faith [although Luther does make a reasoned, albeit rhetorical and slightly obnoxious-sounding, argument for why it is necessary in his German translation), Post-Luther Protestants (even denominational Lutherans) read the Epistle of James and no Bible that I know of in English uses ‘faith alone’ in the Romans passage, yet Protestant theology remains defensible.

Did you know that Jesus said,
“21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” KJV

((CONT’D))

 

[nsper7]

Yes, I am familiar with the passage, but I do not see its bearing on the Catholic vs. Protestant debate. What exactly is your point with this quote? Personally, this passage always bothered me because I wondered if it meant that I would one day be rejected by Christ at judgment, but once taken in context, this passage seems a warning to the Pharisees: they did many great things in God’s name, but they rejected Jesus. What is the will of the Father? See John 6:40. They did man good works, except for the one truly wanted by God: believe in Jesus Christ His only Son (John 6:29).

Did you know that Paul said,
2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Prior to the canonization of Scripture, all teachings would be through ‘word’ (oral tradition) and ‘epistle’ (the writings of St. Paul, St. Peter, St. James, St. Jude, etc.). For example, it is strongly believed that gospels were not written down on paper until some years of Jesus’ ascension. Until they were written down, the gospel stories would have been spread through oral tradition and epistle (look at Luke’s gospel and the Acts of the Apostles, it is pre- and postscripted as a letter written to convince someone of the Truth).

Did you know that,
some protestant denominations claim the bible is completely literal, except when Jesus says “this is my Body…This is my Blood”

You are confusing literal with literalistic. The literal meaning of Scripture is what was meant to be conveyed by the Divinely inspired authors (this is why good apologists harp on the importance at such things as context and linguistics in interpreting Scripture, esp. since Scripture was written to a high-context audience: things the author would have assumed the audience already knew would not be directly mentioned). The literalistic meaning is the prima facia (first glance) where Scripture is treated like a newspaper or the newest bit of pulp fiction that anybody can just pick up and read it and assume that everything can be easily picked out without further study (i.e. of the original languages, the socio-cultural context, etc.).

Fundamentalists are stereotypically obsessed with the literalistic meaning, but I am not a Fundamentalist. I quickly realized how dangerous Fundamentalism is and that it leads to apparent discrepancies in Scripture (those discrepancies are only apparent and are, if context and language and such is examined, shown to be nonexistant).

((I’ll talk about more stuff later. I’m a little tired))